Re: [Rd] R CMD check and CRAN's Rust policy

2025-03-31 Thread Chris Black
I took a more extreme version of this approach for a project that keeps many R packages in a monorepo and checks them all at once, where we do a lot of saying “let’s ignore this warning _in this package_ until someone has a chance to fix it properly, but still fail the build if it shows up in _o

Re: [Rd] [EXTERNAL] Re: NOTE: multiple local function definitions for ?fun? with different formal arguments

2024-10-21 Thread Chris Black
I’m replying 8 months later to say a proper thanks to Duncan for the function below. It’s been helping me clean up duplicate (and not-quite duplicate!) function definitions in amateur code ever since, and I’m reminded to say so now because I just passed it along to Ben Zipperer in response to a

Re: [Rd] specials and ::

2024-08-26 Thread Chris Black
It’s completely reasonable to decline to do extra work to support it, but at the same time: Qualified calls are widely used and recommended, and users are also being completely reasonable when they try to use them (probably without checking the manual!) and expect them to work. Would there be a

Re: [Rd] [EXTERNAL] Re: NOTE: multiple local function definitions for ?fun? with different formal arguments

2024-02-07 Thread Chris Black
Hopefully to too much of a tangent: A related problem this check doesn’t catch is accidental top-level redefinitions in package code, such as ## a.R: helper <- function() 1 f <- function() { helper() } # “cool, f() must return 1" ## b.R: helper <- function(x) 2 g <- function() { helper() } # “